Interesting Article on ID

THis seems like an interesting perspective on theh issue. Thoughts? Comments?



linkage


(cross posted in politics as well)

[imported_luckyme]

Logically challenged as usual -

Darwin is quoted as saying ( I never checked the reference) -
[ QUOTE ]
According to Darwin, if you demonstrate "that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications," the theory will break down.

[/ QUOTE ]

and Jerry Coyne is claimed to have a contrary opinion with -
[ QUOTE ]
"In view of our progress in understanding biochemical evolution, it is simply irrational to say that because we do not completely understand how biochemical pathways evolved, we should give up trying and invoke the intelligent designer."

[/ QUOTE ]

All Coyne is saying is since we've discovered the brain isn't there to cool our blood, we should use it to realize that not knowing the answer doesn't mean we know the answer.

The Behe claims have been disproven since the publication of his book, but naturally the uninformed still think his "I don't know how this could be, therefore the ID guy did it" is somehow credible, even thought it a 'gap' argument to start with.

[ QUOTE ]
The most common argument against ID, that it invokes God and so cannot be a part of science

[/ QUOTE ] The reason ID can't be part of science is the it's not set in a scientific framework. A belief that we're all just part of a drunken atheists dream would not make it into a biology class either... perhaps a philosophy one, because I think I know what forum he hangs out in on his days off.

[ QUOTE ]
But ID proponents aren't questioning the fact that dinosaurs predated humans and invertebrates predated birds; our question, rather, is how they came to be.

[/ QUOTE ]

So do ID proponents actually believe in evolution after the point when God created some single cell organisms? (And are they agreeing Genesis is wrong?)

Do they believe humans were created from scratch a long time after dinosaurs? And if so, why has God now stopped creating new species, or do they claim he is creating the ones that have been observed evolving?

[ QUOTE ]
bacterial flagellum or blood clotting could not have been "formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications" — because they don't function at all unless they are complete.

[/ QUOTE ]
I actually just did a 10 minute presentation in my speech class on why ID is a load of crap and this is one of the arguments I refuted. It's been proven that blood clotting protiens evolved from other protiens that were existent in the digestive system, it just took close to 10 years, if I remember correctly, to prove it.

[ QUOTE ]
The reason ID can't be part of science is the it's not set in a scientific framework.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's a point most ID activists seem to forget about, science only deals with things that are proven, which evolution has been every time it's been tested.

[ QUOTE ]
What we have actually seen is the reverse: Ever since Darwin, and especially in recent decades, the problems with the theory of evolution have been deepening and widening

[/ QUOTE ]
This is just a lie. Recent advancements in science, especially on the molecular level have proven the theory of evolution better than ever before. The fact that we share 99% of our DNA with monkeys and even 95% or so of it with mice is just a tiny example.

[ QUOTE ]
So do ID proponents actually believe in evolution after the point when God created some single cell organisms? (And are they agreeing Genesis is wrong?)

[/ QUOTE ]

That's one of the main problems I feel is with ID. When did God exactly intervene? When humans were formed? When life first started? ID can't prove any of this. It just leaves us with more questions and an "intelligent designer" that goes to really great lengths to trick us into the fact that we evolved.

[maurile]

[ QUOTE ]

THis seems like an interesting perspective on theh issue. Thoughts? Comments?



linkage


(cross posted in politics as well)

[/ QUOTE ]
Good criticism here: A Muslim Defense of ID

[Dominic]

another interesting article on ID

ID is for dummies